Request For Reconsideration Of July 8, 2025 Order
SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CPF25519024 - September 8, 2025 Hearing date: September 8, 2025 Case number: CPF25519024 Case title: ROBERT JAMES CORLISS ET AL VS. CROSSROADS FINANCING, LLC, A CONNECTICUT Case Number: | | CPF25519024 | Case Title: | | ROBERT JAMES CORLISS ET AL VS. CROSSROADS FINANCING, LLC, A CONNECTICUT | Court Date: | | 2025-09-08 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Request For Reconsideration Of July 8, 2025 Order; And Declaration Of Samuel Kornhauser | Rulings: | | On the Law & Motion/Discovery calendar for Monday, September 8, 2025, Line 1, PETITIONER ROBERT CORLISS' Request For Reconsideration Of July 8, 2025 Order.
Petitioner Robert James Corliss's Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.
Petitioner moves under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008. A motion for reconsideration by a party under section 1008 must be "based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law." (Code of Civ. Proc. section 1008(a)&(b).) The moving party bears the burden of proving that the alleged "new or different facts, circumstances, or law" could not, with reasonable diligence, have been discovered or produced earlier. (New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 206, 212-213.) This standard is jurisdictional. (See Code of Civil Procedure section 1008(e).)
Petitioner has not made the requisite showing. Petitioner's counsel's failure to appear at the July 8, 2025, hearing is not new different circumstances justifying a redo of the motion. Counsel knew he had a scheduling conflict before the date and time set for the hearing. He chose not to seek a continuance. Even without a continuance, counsel had options: appearance by Zoom or appearance by telephone. Counsel elected the latter and had the responsibility to ensure in advance his ability to make his appearance by his chosen method. If counsel's chosen method failed him, that does not give him a right to yet another hearing on the motion.
In any event, counsel seeks rehearing to argue application of CCP section 1292.2 in light of the contract. The court has already rejected Petitioner's section 1292.2 argument with the contract before it. (See Order, filed July 8, 2025, at p. 3.) Petitioner has not established any new or different circumstances related to the issues properly before the court on the motion of which reconsideration is sought.
Finally, the record shows another superior court judge in another county has since considered counsel's very same argument, rejected it (like this court) and proceeded in the matter. This court is not inclined to assume concurrent jurisdiction to give Petitioner what would be at least a third bite at the same apple.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ) | |